An independent committee investigating the cause of Hong Kong’s deadliest fire in decades began hearing final arguments Wednesday as the inquiry moves toward a conclusion, with former residents and relatives of the dead still waiting for answers from a panel set up by the Hong Kong city government.
The November fire engulfed seven buildings of an apartment complex, killing 168 people and shattering the close-knit community of Wang Fuk Court, which housed thousands of people in the suburban Tai Po district. The scale of the loss sits at the center of the hearings, but so does the machinery around it: management companies, contractors, regulators, and a legal process that can describe the disaster without touching the question of legal liability.
Who Pays for the Collapse
Former residents and relatives of the deceased have been waiting for answers from the committee, which was established in December by the Hong Kong city government with an expectation that the work would take nine months. Lawyers representing residents, the government and the committee are expected to lay out their arguments before the hearings conclude Friday. The panel’s scope does not include possible legal liabilities for those linked to the fire’s outbreak, which will be handled by law enforcement authorities. That division matters. The inquiry can explain, but it cannot itself assign criminal blame.
The three-member committee is led by High Court Judge David Lok and includes Chan Kin-por, a member of the city’s Executive Council, and Rex Auyeung, who serves on the Hospital Authority Board. The structure says plenty on its own. The people asked to examine the disaster come from the same institutional world that governs it.
When the hearings began in March, committee lead lawyer Victor Dawes said the evidence showed multiple factors contributed to the disaster, from fire alarms and hose systems being shut off to the use of non-fire-retardant scaffolding netting and covering windows with foam boards. Those details point to a chain of decisions and failures that ordinary residents had to live with, and then die under.
What Residents Heard
Some Wang Fuk Court residents who listened to Wednesday’s arguments said part of those involved in the incident seemed to be trying to deflect responsibility. Betty Ho was unsure if she could learn the truth, but said she hoped the committee could find justice for the deceased victims. "I don’t think we’ll get what we hoped for in the end," she said.
Patrick Liu said he doesn’t have much expectation. "Basically, everyone is just shirking responsibility. There’s no need to even think about it," Liu said, adding that he learned about what had happened but he still needed to wait for the committee’s report and a court trial to fully understand who should be accountable. The wait itself is part of the story. People who lost homes and family members are left to sit through procedure while institutions sort out their own version of events.
Martin Ho, representing ISS EastPoint Properties, said the property management company’s in-house electrician inadvertently switched off the fire alarm system when emptying water tanks. The mistake was regrettable but could have been avoided if the complex’s fire service installation contractor had been present during the process, Ho said. Another installation contractor later noted the issue but did not follow up properly, Ho said, adding that a director of that contractor pointed to the industry’s mentality of not teaching other companies how to work. The lawyer called it "baffling."
Aaron Chan, a lawyer for a director of one of the fire service installation contractors, said his client agreed the fire alarm system would help reduce casualties but hoped the committee could consider the window to escape might be very short and other factors. Judge David Lok, who led the committee, stepped in and asked Chan not to tell him the alarms are useless. Chan quickly denied it but said he wanted to present other factors for consideration.
What the System Is Examining
The committee also is examining whether systemic problems such as bid-rigging have occurred in Hong Kong’s large-scale building maintenance and renovation works. The panel is expected to give suggestions after reviewing the fire’s cause, potential systemic problems and whether existing regulations and penalties are sufficient. That’s the reform lane: review, suggest, adjust penalties, keep the structure standing.
A representative of the Competition Commission, an antitrust organization, on Wednesday said bid-rigging groups existed in the city and in some cases were associated with criminal groups known as triads. Former residents, government officers and experts have given evidence in previous rounds of hearings. CCTV footage, documents and records of text messages also were used as evidence. The record is thick. The accountability, so far, is not.
Hong Kong authorities charged seven people and two companies in June with offenses including manslaughter and conspiracy to defraud over the fire. The companies include Will Power Architects Company, a consultancy, and Prestige Construction & Engineering Co., the main contractor involved in a major renovation project at Wang Fuk Court at the time of the blaze. Authorities alleged the people in charge of the renovation project and the relevant companies were seriously negligent in monitoring the materials used in the project and the procedures involved. They also alleged the two companies and some defendants conspired to defraud Wang Fuk Court apartment owners by concealing previous Prestige litigation records and inflating the firm’s score in a tender analysis report.
The names, the charges, the documents, the footage — all of it sketches a familiar hierarchy. Residents at the bottom. Contractors and officials above them. A city government inquiry in the middle. And law enforcement waiting at the edge, ready to handle liability after the fact.